DEFENDING THE LANGUAGE [SOCIAL ENGINEERING]

Eliminating a Word does not Eliminate the Problem

As I have explained in “Form and Function” and again in my first post in the “DEFENDING THE LANGUAGE” series, it is not the word we use to discuss something that defines it, it is the nature of a thing that defines that thing.  This is why, when the language manipulators told us we could not use the word ‘handicapped’ anymore, that we had to say ‘challenged,’ people did not change the picture in their head of a handicapped person.  Children still taunt those with problems, they just use different words.  Instead, what actually happened is the language manipulators added an additional euphemism to our lexicon.  If you try, I am sure you can think of more than one example of an adult using the term ‘challenged’ to attack or insult someone.  So, what was changed by telling people they can’t call people handicapped anymore?  Nothing changed.  But people who continue to advocate such changes in the language, and the majority of them do so in the sincere belief that they can affect human behavior in the process.  What this represents is a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature, language and reasoning that borders on the edge of mental illness.  In most cases, society can handle these people, but what is society to do when the majority of those in power suffer from these misunderstandings?

Democrat Sheila Jackson Lee Wants Change: Don’t Think of It as ‘Welfare,’ Think of It as a ‘Transitional Living Fund’

“Maybe the word welfare should be changed to something of a transitional living fund,” she said in a speech that praised the so-called “war on poverty” and government welfare programs. “For that is what it is — for people to be able to live.”

What this woman is trying to do is to change human nature by manipulating the language.  Why does she think she can do this?  Because it is possible to manipulate people through language; we call it propaganda, and it has been turned into a science.  Today, the practitioners of this ‘science’ call their practice ‘public relations’ or ‘commercial marketing,’ but it is the manipulation of human behavior.  These same people tend to think they can also change the economy and politics and many other aspects of human nature through the manipulation of the mechanisms controlling those aspects of our lives. But there is a problem with their logic: manipulation is not the same thing as change.

Opponents of welfare point out that it is theft, and that it enslaves those who are having their property stolen (see my post on this issue).  But opponents of welfare also point out – and rightly so – that human nature dictates that the mere existence of welfare programs will produce more people demanding to receive it.  In short, welfare programs create a dependency class who live off the producers in society.  The proof is all around us, but one has to look for it because the media is controlled, as well.  It has to be; it is part of the manipulation (i.e. propaganda) system used to direct us:

Scores of Former Cops, Firefighters Rounded up in Connection to Massive, $400M Scam

Law enforcement officials rounded up more than 100 suspects Tuesday morning in a massive disability fraud investigation in the New York City area, according to the Manhattan District Attorney’s office.

Read the story.  Not only does it demonstrate that we have created a dependency class, it shows that the very people we depend upon to protect us and to enforce our laws are among the very people abusing the welfare system.  When the people who society must be able to trust most start to take advantage of society, then you have left society and entered back into the law of nature; back into a state of anarchy.  And welfare States help to create such anarchy because – by definition – socialism must rest on lawlessness.  When you can ‘legally’ exploit (i.e. enslave) the worker for the benefit of those who refuse to work but vote for the people who pass the laws creating and sustaining such a  system, then you have entered into a state of anarchy (again, by definition).

This is what Rep. Lee is demanding, and she sincerely believes she can help bring this social change about by simply changing the language we are allowed to use.  This is what everyone who thinks they can change human nature is trying to do by trying to control the language, and the same principle applies to every attempt to change Natural Law.  All that ever comes of it is social decay and anarchy.

Now ask yourself: can anyone who advocates for anarchy and lawlessness honestly claim to be a friend of society or humanity?

0 responses to “DEFENDING THE LANGUAGE [SOCIAL ENGINEERING]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *